Difference between revisions of "Seeing Hashem/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
(Elaboration of R Moshe Taku's opinion) |
|||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" – What did they see?</b> Neither Rashi nor Rashbam elaborate on what it means to see Hashem directly or detail what it was that the people who merited to do so saw.  Rashbam, though, implies that even in cases of direct revelation, the vision is veiled or incomplete.  By Moshe, the verse states explicitly that Moshe only saw Hashem's "back" and Rashbam claims that this is what the elders in Shemot 24 saw as well. By Avraham, the verses describe a pillar of smoke and fire passing by, suggesting that there, too, the vision was obscured to some degree.</point> | <point><b>"וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" – What did they see?</b> Neither Rashi nor Rashbam elaborate on what it means to see Hashem directly or detail what it was that the people who merited to do so saw.  Rashbam, though, implies that even in cases of direct revelation, the vision is veiled or incomplete.  By Moshe, the verse states explicitly that Moshe only saw Hashem's "back" and Rashbam claims that this is what the elders in Shemot 24 saw as well. By Avraham, the verses describe a pillar of smoke and fire passing by, suggesting that there, too, the vision was obscured to some degree.</point> | ||
| − | <point><b>Corporeality of Hashem</b> – It is unclear whether Rashi and Rashbam believed that Hashem might take on a corporeal form.<fn>See, for example, discussions in N. Slifkin, <a href="http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%207%20Slifkin.pdf">Was Rashi a Corporealist?</a>, Hakirah 7 (2009): 81-205, and M. Zucker, <a href="http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%209%20Zucker.pdf">No, Rashi Was Not a Corporealist</a>, Hakirah 9 (2010): 15-43. For more general discussions of Jewish attitudes towards anthropomorphism and Hashem's corporeality, see Y. Lorberbaum, "על דעתם של חכמים ז"ל לא עלתה הגשמה מעולם - אנתרופומורפיות בספרות חז"ל - סקירת מחקר ביקורתית", Jewish Studies 40 (2000): 3-54, and S. Friedman, "צלם, דמות ותבנית", Sidra 22 (2007): 89-152.<br/>Commentators who hailed from Moslem lands, such as R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel, and Rambam, tended to vehemently oppose the concept of a corporeal God, declaring such stance heretical.  They were likely influenced by Muslim doctrines of incorporeality.  Commentators living in Christian countries, in contrast, where the concept of a corporeal God was widely accepted, might not have found the idea so troubling and might have been been more willing to accept anthropomorphic language in both Tanakh and Aggadah as being literal and signifying that Hashem has a body.</fn>  If this position were to maintain, as | + | <point><b>Corporeality of Hashem</b> – It is unclear whether Rashi and Rashbam believed that Hashem might take on a corporeal form.<fn>See, for example, discussions in N. Slifkin, <a href="http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%207%20Slifkin.pdf">Was Rashi a Corporealist?</a>, Hakirah 7 (2009): 81-205, and M. Zucker, <a href="http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%209%20Zucker.pdf">No, Rashi Was Not a Corporealist</a>, Hakirah 9 (2010): 15-43. For more general discussions of Jewish attitudes towards anthropomorphism and Hashem's corporeality, see Y. Lorberbaum, "על דעתם של חכמים ז"ל לא עלתה הגשמה מעולם - אנתרופומורפיות בספרות חז"ל - סקירת מחקר ביקורתית", Jewish Studies 40 (2000): 3-54, and S. Friedman, "צלם, דמות ותבנית", Sidra 22 (2007): 89-152.<br/>Commentators who hailed from Moslem lands, such as R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel, and Rambam, tended to vehemently oppose the concept of a corporeal God, declaring such stance heretical.  They were likely influenced by Muslim doctrines of incorporeality.  Commentators living in Christian countries, in contrast, where the concept of a corporeal God was widely accepted, might not have found the idea so troubling and might have been been more willing to accept anthropomorphic language in both Tanakh and Aggadah as being literal and signifying that Hashem has a body.</fn>  If this position were to maintain, as <multilink><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">R. Moshe Taku</a><a href="RMosheTakuKetavTamimprintedinOtzarNechmad" data-aht="source">Ketav Tamim (printed in Otzar Nechmad)</a></multilink> is often understood to believe,<fn>However, for an opposing position see Joseph Dan, "Ashkenazi Hasidism and the Maimonidean Controversy" in Maimonidean Studies vol. 3, pp.42-43, who argues that Taku "most probably... did not" believe in an anthropomorphic God.</fn> that Hashem does adopt a corporeal form at times, then the Biblical characters who "saw Hashem" could actually have seen a physical manifestation of Hashem's corporeal form, and phrases such as "וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" might be understood literally.</point> |
<point><b>"הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן"</b> – Rashbam explains that Hashem spoke to Moshe "in the thickness of the cloud" to prevent Moshe from seeing Hashem.  This is consistent with the notion that Hashem might literally manifest Himself, necessitating cover to protect human observers.</point> | <point><b>"הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן"</b> – Rashbam explains that Hashem spoke to Moshe "in the thickness of the cloud" to prevent Moshe from seeing Hashem.  This is consistent with the notion that Hashem might literally manifest Himself, necessitating cover to protect human observers.</point> | ||
<point><b>"וְלֹא יָמוּת כִּי בֶּעָנָן אֵרָאֶה עַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת"</b> – This position might understand that Hashem is literally revealed on the<i> kapporet</i> and therefore any who enter the Inner Sanctum and see Him will die. Rashbam explains that for this reason, before entering the Inner Sanctum on Yom HaKippurim, the priest must first make a cloud of incense whereby the House is darkened and his vision blocked.</point> | <point><b>"וְלֹא יָמוּת כִּי בֶּעָנָן אֵרָאֶה עַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת"</b> – This position might understand that Hashem is literally revealed on the<i> kapporet</i> and therefore any who enter the Inner Sanctum and see Him will die. Rashbam explains that for this reason, before entering the Inner Sanctum on Yom HaKippurim, the priest must first make a cloud of incense whereby the House is darkened and his vision blocked.</point> | ||
Version as of 09:39, 22 February 2020
Seeing Hashem
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators struggle to understand how Hashem reveals Himself to mankind and what the text implies when it states that an individual "saw Hashem". Some commentators assume that man really may see some manifestation of Hashem, either directly or prophetically. Rashbam, thus, allows for direct revelation, claiming that in rare instances, when Hashem makes a covenantal relationship, He might grant the second party the honor of viewing Him without fear of mortal peril. Ibn Ezra, instead, claims that any visions of Hashem in Tanakh must be understood to have taken place in a prophetic dream. In such a dream, man might imagine Hashem even in human form. Physically seeing Hashem, though, is impossible.
Others suggest that all verses which speak of "seeing Hashem" need to be reinterpreted and explained non-literally. Rambam claims that the word "see" can refer to comprehension rather than physical sight and that such verses describe attaining a level of cognition of the Divine. A final approach suggests that verses which speak of Hashem's revelation really refer only to the manifestation of Hashem's glory (a brilliant created light) or to an angel. Each is referred to as "Hashem" after the One who sent or created it. Many commentators combine these approaches, explaining the various revelations on a case by case basis.
Actually Perceiving Hashem
At times, Hashem directly reveals Himself, allowing humans to glimpse God Himself.
"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – This approach assumes that humans are physically capable of receiving a direct revelation of Hashem, yet doing so generally results in death. There are, however, certain exceptions:
- Stay of execution – Rashi maintains that though in all cases in which humans directly see Hashem they will die, in exceptional circumstances this death can be delayed. Thus, though Nadav and Avihu and the elders saw Hashem at Sinai (Shemot 24), Hashem pushed off their deaths so as not to mar the happiness of receiving the Torah.
- No death – Rashbam, in contrast, asserts that in some situations, seeing Hashem is a privilege granted by Hashem, not deserving of death at all. When making a covenant, Hashem might honor the second party by allowing them to see Hashem as He passes by.1 Thus, Avraham merited to see Hashem pass (Bereshit 15:17-18) at the Covenant Between the Pieces, the elders qualified to see Hashem (Shemot 24:10-11) at the covenant at Sinai, and Moshe was able to see Hashem (Shemot 33:23 and Shemot 34:6) in the context of the covenant in Shemot 34:10.
Revelation at Sinai – This approach might suggest that the revelation at Sinai, being a covenant, was a direct revelation as well, and the people were granted permission to see some manifestation of Hashem.2 This would match the description of the event being a "face to face" encounter, but would appear to contradict Moshe's statement, "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם". The seeming contradiction might be resolved in a number of ways:
- It is possible that Hashem granted the nation permission to look, but only from afar, at which distance the nation could not really see Hashem regardless.3 As such, they saw no "picture", though they did watch Hashem's descent, as per the literal understanding of "יֵרֵד י״י לְעֵינֵי כׇל הָעָם". The encounter was "face to face" in the sense that nothing concrete obscured the vision, only distance.
- It is also possible that the people really were privileged to see Hashem, but that Hashem does not have a form that can in any way be called a "תְּמוּנָה", and this is what Moshe emphasizes in Sefer Devarim.
"וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" – What did they see? Neither Rashi nor Rashbam elaborate on what it means to see Hashem directly or detail what it was that the people who merited to do so saw. Rashbam, though, implies that even in cases of direct revelation, the vision is veiled or incomplete. By Moshe, the verse states explicitly that Moshe only saw Hashem's "back" and Rashbam claims that this is what the elders in Shemot 24 saw as well. By Avraham, the verses describe a pillar of smoke and fire passing by, suggesting that there, too, the vision was obscured to some degree.
Corporeality of Hashem – It is unclear whether Rashi and Rashbam believed that Hashem might take on a corporeal form.4 If this position were to maintain, as R. Moshe Taku is often understood to believe,5 that Hashem does adopt a corporeal form at times, then the Biblical characters who "saw Hashem" could actually have seen a physical manifestation of Hashem's corporeal form, and phrases such as "וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי" might be understood literally.
"הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן" – Rashbam explains that Hashem spoke to Moshe "in the thickness of the cloud" to prevent Moshe from seeing Hashem. This is consistent with the notion that Hashem might literally manifest Himself, necessitating cover to protect human observers.
"וְלֹא יָמוּת כִּי בֶּעָנָן אֵרָאֶה עַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת" – This position might understand that Hashem is literally revealed on the kapporet and therefore any who enter the Inner Sanctum and see Him will die. Rashbam explains that for this reason, before entering the Inner Sanctum on Yom HaKippurim, the priest must first make a cloud of incense whereby the House is darkened and his vision blocked.
Visions of Hashem by prophets – "רָאִיתִי אֶת י״י יֹשֵׁב" – This position must explain how Mikhaihu, Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, and Daniel are all said to see Hashem, describing him sitting on a throne, yet do not die:
- Rashi writes that all prophets (excluding Moshe) see through "a non-transparent glass".6 It is not clear if Rashi's emphasis is on the lack of clarity in these prophets' visions or on the very fact that they occurred in a prophetic dream rather than being a direct and conscious revelation.7 Either way, this opaque or non-physical viewing is what allowed them to survive the revelation.
- Rashbam speaks explicitly only of Mikhaihu's vision of Hashem, but appears to concur with the first understanding of Rashi. He states that the vision was fuzzy, like someone who can make out the outline of a friend but not see His face.
Revelation to Avot – "...וַיֵּרָא י״י אֶל" – Neither Rashi nor Rashbam explicitly address the nature of most of these revelations:
- Prophetic vision & veiled encounter – They could explain them in the same manner as they do the explicit visions of Hashem described by Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, and Mikhaihu discussed above, that these were either prophetic visions or otherwise veiled and fuzzy revelations.
- Hashem = an angel – Alternatively, they might suggest that, at least in some of these cases, the term Hashem refers not to Hashem Himself, but to his messenger, an angel who is called after the One who sent him. This is how Rashbam explains the appearance of "Hashem" to Avraham in Bereshit 18:1 and to Moshe by the Burning Bush.8
"'כְּבוֹד ה" – Neither Rashi nor Rashbam explicitly define the term, but might suggest that it refers to either some aspect of Hashem Himself, a created entity that signifies His presence, or His deeds which testify to His glory:
- Cloaked manifestation – In many of the cases in which "כְּבוֹד י"י" is mentioned, the verse also mentions the presence of Hashem's cloud.9 As such, if it does refer to some manifestation of Hashem Himself, it seems that this is always cloaked in the pillar of cloud so as to obscure the vision to all who looked at it, protecting them from death.10
- Cloud of glory - Alternatively, it is possible that the "glory" refers to the cloud itself,11 and is meant to signify Hashem, but is not any part of Hashem Himself. As such, it is not dangerous to gaze upon it.
- Hashem's deeds – Rashbam maintains that in some of the cases where the term appears, it does not refer to Hashem at all but rather to His miraculous deeds. For example, by the manna, when Moshe and Aharon tell the nation, "וּבֹקֶר וּרְאִיתֶם אֶת כְּבוֹד י״י" (Shemot 16:7), they are referring to the miracle of the manna itself.12
Does Moshe see more than others?
- Rashi suggests that Moshe did see more than others. Drawing off Bavli Yevamot 49b, he claims that while others could only see Hashem through an "opaque glass", Moshe perceived him through a transparent one. Nonetheless, he points out that even Moshe only saw "מראה אחוריים" and not "מראה שכינה" for even Moshe cannot see the Shechinah and live.13
- Rashbam, in contrast, implies that Moshe did not necessarily see any more than others who similarly merited to receive a direct revelation during a covenantal ceremony. If so, Moshe's uniqueness as a prophet might instead lay in his constant communication with Hashem and his fuller comprehension of the Divine message.14
Prophetic Vision
Hashem does not directly reveal Himself, and He appears to man only via prophecy. All described visions of God took place only in a prophetic dream.
Sources:R. Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, R. Chananel, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, Rambam, Radak, R. Avraham b. HaRambam, R"Y Albo, Seforno, Shadal, Malbim, R. D"Z Hoffmann
Corporeality of Hashem – These sources deny the corporeality of Hashem and, thus, the possibility that someone might physically see Hashem in any tangible form. Anthropomorphic language (mention of body parts or actions normally requiring a body and the like) is understood metaphorically and is viewed as an attempt to speak in terms that humans can understand. Cases where individuals are said to see Hashem are understood as prophetic visions.
What do prophets see? R. Chananel, R"Y Bekhor Shor, Rambam, and R. Avraham b. HaRambam all imply that every prophet might receive a different prophetic image, with some envisioning Hashem as a king on a throne and others seeing Him as a hero in war or as an elderly man wrapped in a prayer shawl. Sometimes, too, Hashem does not provide an image with a human shape or even any concrete form at all, but rather signals His revelation via a glowing light15 or other created image.16
"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – These sources offer various explanations of the apparent contradiction between Hashem's assertion that "no man can see Me and live" and the many verses17 in which the simple sense of the text implies that man did in fact see Hashem:
- Physical vs. prophetic seeing – R. Chananel distinguishes between physically seeing Hashem, which is impossible, and prophets receiving an image in a dream or vision, which is possible.18
- Full understanding vs. prophetic image – Rambam, in contrast, asserts that the verse "לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" refers not to the inability of mortals to see God, but to their inability to attain a deep, complete understanding of His essence.19 Other verses which speak of seeing God refer to prophetic visions which man can safely receive with proper preparation.
- Different levels of prophecy – R. Yosef Albo claims that Moshe, being on the highest level of prophecy, could never see Hashem even in a prophetic vision since his prophecies were unaffected by the imagination.20 Other prophets, though, could see images representing Hashem in their prophetic dreams.21
Revelation to Avot – "...וַיֵּרָא י״י אֶל" – Malbim and R. D"Z Hoffmann22 point out that this formulation (as opposed to the language of "...וַיֹּאמֶר י"י אֶל") refers to a unique type of prophecy in which Hashem not only speaks to a prophet but also appears to them in some visual image.23
"לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם" – Shadal asserts that Moshe's wording, "you did not see a "תְּמוּנָה" (a likeness) of Hashem", teaches not only that the masses did not physically see Hashem at Sinai,24 but that they did not see even a prophetic visualization of Him.25
"Face to face" revelation at Sinai – Given both that these sources understand that Hashem does not have a face and that Devarim 4:15 explicitly states, "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה בְּיוֹם דִּבֶּר י״י אֲלֵיכֶם", all these sources interpret the phrase "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" non literally:
- Unmediated revelation – Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and R. Hoffmann assert that the description teaches that the nation heard Hashem's voice/words directly, without the mediation of Moshe,26 not that they saw Hashem's face.
- Conscious prophecy – Seforno understands "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" to mean that the nation received prophecy while fully in control of their senses. Rambam similarly claims that they apprehended the Divine and heard His voice without the intervention of an angel.27 As such, the phrase says nothing about actually seeing the face or any image of Hashem.
- Prophetic image – R. Bachya, following the Midrash28 (and in contrast to Shadal above), suggests that the phrase "פָּנִים בְּפָנִים" refers to the many images via which Hashem appeared to the different members of the nation during the revelation at Sinai. It seems that he is referring to prophetic images, while the verse "לֹא רְאִיתֶם כׇּל תְּמוּנָה" refers to the nation not having physically seen a picture of Hashem Himself.
The elders at Sinai (Shemot 24) – According to this approach29 the elders did not literally see Hashem, but received a prophetic vision in which they imagined Hashem as described in these verses.30 Shadal explains that this was unique since the masses had only heard Hashem's voice at Sinai31 and were not privileged to also prophetically see any created image.32 Seforno goes a step further to suggest that the elders merited to prophesy and see this image while still in control of their faculties.33
"כְּבוֹד י"י" – These sources suggest that, depending on the context, this term can refer to either Hashem's essence and nature, a created light or fire meant to signify His presence (and generally clothed in a cloud to protect viewers from its brilliance) or miracles. According to all these possibilities, in none of the verses in which someone is said to have seen "כְּבוֹד ה" does it mean that they physically saw Hashem Himself.
Moshe's request: "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" – These sources divide in their understanding of what Moshe requested when he asked, "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" and in the meaning of Hashem's response, "לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי."
- Hashem's glory – Shadal asserts that Moshe requested to see the created light of Hashem's glory, not in a prophetic dream but while awake.34 Hashem responded that it is impossible to view it frontally, but allowed him to do so in passing.
- Comprehension of the Divine – According to Rambam, R. Avraham b. HaRambam,35 Seforno, and Malbim, Moshe was asking to understand some aspect of Hashem's being and existence. Hashem replied that a complete understanding was impossible, but Moshe could attain partial comprehension.
Uniqueness of Moshe – These commentators suggest that it was not the ability to receive a prophetic image of Hashem which elevated Moshe over others, as this was not unique (and might even be interpreted as signifying a prophetic deficiency).36 Rather, it was the level and manner in which he received his prophecies which differentiated him. Moshe was capable of prophesying when awake37 and could do so whenever he desired.38 Moreover, Hashem communicated with him directly and not via an angel39 so that he received clear messages, and not analogies and riddles.40
Cognitive Experience
When Torah speaks of humans seeing Hashem, it refers to a cognitive experience, man's comprehending of some aspect of Hashem's nature.
Corporeality – These sources deny the corporeality of Hashem and, thus, the possibility that someone might physically see Hashem in any tangible form. Cases where individuals are said to see Hashem are understood to refer to their having reached a level of cognition of the Divine.
The roots ראה, הביט, חזה – Rambam asserts that each of these words have more than one meaning and can refer not only to physical vision, but also to mental insight. As such, the phrases "...וַיֵּרָא י״י אֶל" with regards to the Avot, "רָאִיתִי אֶת י"י" / "וָאֶרְאֶה אֶת י"י'" by Mikhaihu and Yeshayahu, "וּתְמֻנַת י"י יַבִּיט" with regards to Moshe, or "וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱ-לֹהִים" by the nobility at Sinai all refer to intellectual perception and do not mean that any of these individuals physically saw Hashem.
"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – These sources understand this to mean that no mortal can totally comprehend Hashem's being. This, though, does not preclude someone reaching a lower level of cognition. As such, there is no contradiction between this statement and verses which present individuals as "seeing Hashem"; the latter simply refer to cases where there is incomplete understanding.41
The Elders at Sinai (Shemot 24) – According to this approach the elders did not physically see Hashem, but rather attempted to understand His essence. Rambam and R. Avraham b. HaRambam42 emphasize that though they were able to achieve a certain level of comprehension, this was at a very low level.43 Rambam criticizes this flawed perception, blaming it on insufficient preparation, and claims that it deserved them death.44 Ralbag, in contrast, raises the possibility that their understanding was a praiseworthy achievement.45
Moshe's request "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" (Shemot 33) – Rambam claims that when Moshe asked "הַרְאֵנִי נָא אֶת כְּבֹדֶךָ" he was requesting to perceive Hashem's true essence. Hashem replied that no mortal can attain such understanding ("לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי"). Hashem, instead, promised Moshe a lower level of perception, that he would comprehend not Hashem's "face" but only His "back" ("וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי").
Face to face revelations – According to this approach, the description of both the Sinaitic revelation and Moshe's interaction with Hashem as being "face to face" does not imply that either the nation or Moshe witnessed Hashem in any form.46 Rambam suggests that it instead refers to the manner of Hashem's revelation, that the nation at Sinai and Moshe (always) apprehended Hashem without the mediation of angel.47
"כְּבוֹד י"י" – These sources suggest that, depending on the context, this term can refer to Hashem's essence (as when Moshe asked to see Hashem's glory), to a light created by Hashem, or to Hashem's miracles. According to all these possibilities, in none of the verses in which someone is said to have seen "כְּבוֹד י"י" does it mean that they physically saw Hashem Himself.
Uniqueness of Moshe – One of the most outstanding characteristics of Moshe's leadership and prophetic prowess was his ability to comprehend more than all others.
"Hashem" reinterpreted
Verses which speak of Hashem appearing to man must be reinterpreted to mean either that Hashem's glory (in the form of a created light, fire or cloud) was revealed, or that there was mediation of an angel.
Corporeality of Hashem – This position denies the possibility that Hashem might take on bodily form, necessitating one to reinterpret any verses which imply that Hashem can be seen. It does so by suggesting that the word Hashem in such verses is either short for "the glory of Hashem" or refers to an angel.
Why refer to an angel or Hashem's glory as Hashem? Ibn Ezra explains that a messenger is like the one who sends him since he is simply doing his bidding; as such he might take on his name.48 So, too, an angel fulfilling Hashem's will might be called by the name of Hashem. R"Y Albo adds that when something belongs to or emanates from another, especially when it serves to represent the other, it might be called by its name. Hence, if Hashem creates a cloud or light to signify Himself, it might be called after Hashem.
"כְּבוֹד י"י" – R. Saadia suggests that this refers to a visual sign, often a brilliant light, created by Hashem to signify to His prophets that it is Hashem who is speaking to them. The cloud or fire which sometimes appears to the people in the Wilderness is similarly referred to as "כבוד י"י" as it, too, serves to verify that Hashem is speaking to their leaders.49 As such, when Hashem is said to have appeared to a prophet (...וירא י"י אל) , or when prophets such as Yeshayahu are said to have seen an image of Hashem, this might refer to this glory.
Angels – Both R. Saadia and R"Y Albo assume that, with the exception of Moshe, prophets never receive prophecies directly from Hashem, but rather via an angel. As such, verses which speak of a prophet speaking to or seeing "Hashem" really mean that the prophet was speaking with an angel of Hashem. Thus, for instance, the angel who appears to Moshe in the Burning Bush is referred to as Hashem.50
"יֵרֵד י״י לְעֵינֵי כׇל הָעָם" – This position would reinterpret "Hashem" in this verse as well to refer to His glory.51 Ramban says that the nation viewed this as a "consuming fire", drawing off the description later in the chapter, "יָרַד עָלָיו י״י בָּאֵשׁ" and in Shemot 24, "וּמַרְאֵה כְּבוֹד י״י כְּאֵשׁ אֹכֶלֶת בְּרֹאשׁ הָהָר".
Face to face encounter at Sinai – This approach could suggest that the episode is described as a "face to face" encounter not because the people saw Hashem directly, but because they heard Him directly.52 All they saw at Sinai was the brilliance of His glory which had descended on the mountain, not Hashem Himself.
Elders at Sinai – R. Saadia and R"Y Albo assert that when the verse states, "וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱ-לֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל / וַיֶּחֱזוּ אֶת הָאֱ-לֹהִים", this, too, refers to the glory of Hashem rather than Hashem Himself.53 One might question, though, what was so unique about the vision, considering that the nation had also seen Hashem's glory on the mountain. They might answer that the nation saw this created light only from a far distance and while it was heavily veiled.54 The elders, on the other hand, viewed it from much closer and while less obscured.55
"לֹא יִרְאַנִי הָאָדָם וָחָי" – R. Saadia asserts that Hashem is not referring to the inability to see His bodily form, as He has none, but to seeing even His glory. The created light which constitutes Hashem's glory is so bright and powerful that no mortal can actually look at it directly and live. Moshe requested that Hashem, nonetheless, give him the power to do so. Hashem replied that he would not be able to see the light in its introductory phase ("לֹא תוּכַל לִרְאֹת אֶת פָּנָי") when it is at it strongest, but Hashem would cover his eyes until that passed and then Moshe would be able to see the last less powerful rays, "וְרָאִיתָ אֶת אֲחֹרָי".56
Uniqueness of Moshe – This approach appears to suggest that though all, at times, saw some level of Hashem's glory, the difference in level between prophets relates to the degree of brilliance which they are exposed to, with Moshe being permitted to see more than others. Moreover, while other prophets prophesy only via an angel, Moshe does so without mediation.
